Space shuttle columbia lost

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ Feb. 03 2003,20:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Feb. 03 2003,20:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">What does that mean for scientific research? It means that virtually no long term research is being done on the ISS because the three crew members time is taken up with housekeeping, leaving no time for pure research.<span id='postcolor'>

Cleaning, ironing and doing dishes in a weightless environment is just the kind of research half the people on this planet may directly benefit from.

You're just jealous. <span id='postcolor'>

Why did NASA start sending up women astronauts?

Scroll down

Please dont hit me, Avon..

Please dont ban me for spamming, Denoir....

They figured out the average woman weighs 15 pounds less than a dishwasher...

Ba-Dum-Bump

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Bernadotte @ Feb. 03 2003,20:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ Feb. 03 2003,20:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Cleaning, ironing and doing dishes in a weightless environment is just the kind of research half the people on this planet may directly benefit from.

You're just jealous. <span id='postcolor'>

I can't wait til they send up an astronaut in her fourth trimester.  <span id='postcolor'>

Erm.... fourth trimester?

Tri = 3

I dont think an infant under 3 months would appreciate the boost phase of a launch, though it might be interesting to see how a baby responds to weightlessness.

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Feb. 03 2003,22:05)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">They figured out the average woman weighs 15 pounds less than a dishwasher...<span id='postcolor'>

I'd love to send you outside up there to take out the trash.

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Feb. 03 2003,22:06)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">though it might be interesting to see how a baby responds to weightlessness.<span id='postcolor'>

Well, I'm not gonna change him/her!

[Renagade 0]

on a sidenote how come some places can sell patches of land on the moon and mars ?

What about underwater exploration and whats the progress on that too ?

[Guest]

Have you noticed how all the newer concept designs (X-38,33 etc) seem to lack proper windows? I find this amusing since this was a big issue during the Mercury program where the astronauts demanded windows while the designers didn't want to install any. The astronauts won that time but it would seem that the designers have the upper hand now.

[Bernadotte 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Feb. 03 2003,21:o6)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Erm.... fourth trimester?

Tri = 3<span id='postcolor'>

Ba-Dum-Bump  

[Assault (CAN) 1]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">though it might be interesting to see how a baby responds to weightlessness.<span id='postcolor'>

Could you imagine if someone actually gave birth in space?......What a mess that would be.

However, I would be willing to go into space to see if it is possible to concieve a baby in weightlessness.

Anyways, I wonder if a return to the expendable rocket will be made anytime soon? I would like to see a cost analysis of what it would take to refurbish rockets as opposed to just making new ones and using them once. Think of it this way; every person in the U.S. space program who was launched prior to the shuttle program came home safely. Either way, the shuttles are aging and it is too expensive for NASA to research a new type of shuttle and maintain the current fleet. NASA can't stop using the current fleet to develop a new one because of work on the ISS. Sort of a catch-22 type situation.

Tyler

[Renagade 0]

why have rockets wouldn`t a massive cannon be capable of launching projectiles into space

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Renagade @ Feb. 03 2003,22:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">why have rockets wouldn`t a massive cannon be capable of launching projectiles into space <span id='postcolor'>

That's why the US has to capture Iraq.

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Renagade @ Feb. 03 2003,21:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">why have rockets wouldn`t a massive cannon be capable of launching projectiles into space <span id='postcolor'>

Thank you Mr Verne!

I dont think a cannon would have a hope of accelerating a launch vehicle to escape velocities.

What may work however is a magnetic induction catapult, as theorized by many Sci Fi authors. My favourite is Robert Heinlein in many stories, including The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress (this is an excellent book and I reccomend it to all sci fi fans! ). The problem is we dont currently have the technology to make this work.

So unless we get some sort of miracle fuel that makes escape velocities possible without the huge boosters (or they can make the linear aerospike engines work properly without hte fuel system problems of the X-33), we are stuck with BDB (big dumb boosters)

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Feb. 03 2003,22:56)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">So unless we get some sort of miracle fuel that makes escape velocities possible without the huge boosters (or they can make the linear aerospike engines work properly without hte fuel system problems of the X-33), we are stuck with BDB (big dumb boosters)<span id='postcolor'>

Slingshots!

[Renagade 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Feb. 03 2003,21:56)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Renagade @ Feb. 03 2003,21:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">why have rockets wouldn`t a massive cannon be capable of launching projectiles into space <span id='postcolor'>

Thank you Mr Verne!

I dont think a cannon would have a hope of accelerating a launch vehicle to escape velocities.

What may work however is a magnetic induction catapult, as theorized by many Sci Fi authors.  My favourite is Robert Heinlein in many stories, including The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress  (this is an excellent book and I reccomend it to all sci fi fans! ).  The problem is we dont currently have the technology to make this work.  

So unless we get some sort of miracle fuel that makes escape velocities possible without the huge boosters (or they can make the linear aerospike engines work properly without hte fuel system problems of the X-33), we are stuck with BDB (big dumb boosters)<span id='postcolor'>

like a giant coil gun which would also limit the g-force imposed on the projectile

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Renagade @ Feb. 03 2003,22:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">like a giant coil gun which would also limit the g-force imposed on the projectile <span id='postcolor'>

Bingo

Also sort of cool is Deep Space 1. It's a testbed for the concept of Ion engines, versus chemically fuelled thrusters. There is some good info on this page.

On the budget issues, what needs to be done is increases in the funding for manned space exploration. Doesnt matter how much you increase the overall budget if none of it is spent in that area.

[Guest]

There is an interesting theoretical idea of a space manipulating propulsion drive. The idea is to put the space ship inside a bubble of antimatter and through its polarisation contract and expand time-space. Instead of moving the ship you contract the space in front of you and expand the space behind of you. This is possible thanks to the principles described in the theory of general relativity.

So what's the catch? We need antimatter. Lots of it. Right now we are able to produce and contain single atoms of antimatter. For a propulsion system a lot of it would be needed. Antimatter coming into contact with normal matter transforms directly into energy. If the antimatter required to drive a spaceship would lose containment and come in contact with normal matter there would be an energy burst that would most likely destroy our entire solar system.

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Feb. 03 2003,22:58)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">There is an interesting theoretical idea of a space manipulating propulsion drive. The idea is to put the space ship inside a bubble of antimatter and through its polarisation contract and expand  time-space. Instead of moving the ship you contract the space in front of you and expand the space behind of you. This is possible thanks to the principles described in the theory of general relativity.

So what's the catch? We need antimatter. Lots of it. Right now we are able to produce and contain single atoms of antimatter. For a propulsion system a lot of it would be needed. Antimatter coming into contact with normal matter transforms directly into energy. If the antimatter required to drive a spaceship would lose containment and come in contact with normal matter there would be an energy burst that would most likely destroy our entire solar system.

<span id='postcolor'>

LOL!

There is a propulsion system I want built by the lowest bidder!!!

Hee hee hee.

[bn880 5]

Well, NASA is being really cool about this incident. They are sharing all information with us. (well it looks like)

They estimated that the size of the foam from the tank that hit the bottom of L wing was 20x16x6 inches with approximate weight of 2.5lbs. (Please note these guys are still hopless with the imperial system, the cause of many errors ) The insulation connected with the wing at an intercept angle of 13-16 degrees they think. They did not specify the speed of the object so you can't calculate much yourself.

Anyway, the simulation concluded that maybe one tile near the L wheel well was ripped of, or that an area of 32x20x2 inches of insulating tiles was stripped off.

Either way, the aerodynamic drag from the left wing was more than expected from this damage. And according to the simulation the wing should have stayed in tact.

This is the first clue that there is a missing link.

Second clue is that the left side of the shuttle just over the left wing was also rising in temperature. Abnormal for damage to the bottom of the wing. Hmm...

[Hit_Sqd_Maximus 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Feb. 03 2003,23:38)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">(Please note these guys are still hopless with the imperial system, the cause of many errors   )<span id='postcolor'>

Does nasa really use the old system or did they just say it in inches for the masses to understand? But on the news today they said that the heat shields were about as dense as foam so maybe it wouldnt be that hard to hurt one?

anyway, here is a pic of that ion engine. What happens if you touch that blue?

Way too large picture!

[Akira 0]

So the news that they are discounting the theory that a tile was ripped off on lift-off and damaged the wing. They said the damage, if any, done was negligable.

Obviously something was wrong with the heat tiles, as heat was seeping in from somewhere.

Anyone heard anything about the glide path that it was on or possible deviations near the catastrophe time?

Being in Austin I didn't hear much (I was asleep), but apparently my fiancees Dad heard the explosion and it shook the house.

[Harnu 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">(Please note these guys are still hopless with the imperial system, the cause of many errors   )<span id='postcolor'>

I assume you mean the English system?

And those ion engines... are those the really weak ones that just increase their speed over a a wlong period of time?

[bn880 5]

They are not disputing that a tile was ripped of, the problem is if one was ripped off, the facts still don't match. If an area of tiles was affected as explained before, the drag and heat effects still do not match.

I hope very much NASA realizes that they should ban all imperial measurements on site. Otherwise we could see more lost vehicles etc. (not drawing from Columbia)

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Harnu @ Feb. 03 2003,17:57)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">(Please note these guys are still hopless with the imperial system, the cause of many errors )<span id='postcolor'>

I assume you mean the English system?<span id='postcolor'>

Inches, feet, miles, pounds.

I am watching.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Feb. 03 2003,23:38)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Well, NASA is being really cool about this incident.  They are sharing all information with us. (well it looks like)<span id='postcolor'>

Are you sure about that? I am pretty certain of one thing: their claim that they lost all tracking data on the shuttle after communications was lost is pure bs. Less then impressive military phase array radars can track objects smaller then pineapples at distances more then a couple of hundred kilometers. I find it unbelievable that NASA doesn't have far better radars then that.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Does nasa really use the old system or did they just say it in inches for the masses to understand? <span id='postcolor'>

They mix. Some of the controller interfaces use the english system while the actual calculations are done properly with SI units. A mixup of those two systems resulted in the crash of the satellite + rover on Mars a couple of years ago.

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Feb. 04 2003,00:04)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Are you sure about that? I am pretty certain of one thing: their claim that they lost all tracking data on the shuttle after communications was lost is pure bs. Less then impressive military phase array radars can track objects smaller then pineapples at distances more then a couple of hundred kilometers. I find it unbelievable that NASA doesn't have far better radars then that.<span id='postcolor'>

I suspect they are not talking about ground station tracking, but more the telemetry from onboard sensors and computers.

I think NASA will keep the public in the loop much the same way it did in the Challenger explosion. Namely, we will find out, but it will be pretty thouroughly investigated before they let us know.

[Akira 0]

NASA has always been open and straight-forward with the public. More so than any other goverment agency, because they know the more the public knows the more the public is interested. Their budget lays in interest.